Room for Peace
Mahathir Mohammad is realist, same as (the late) Lee Kuan Yew and (the late) Soeharto. I assume, if Malaysia had at least 4x military scale in the 80s, Malaysia would occupy Singapore. But even Mahathir, joined Professor Mearsheimer, says “Ukraine - Russia war would be prevented”. He (Mahathir) tweeted on Feb 23rd (1 year Ukraine - Russia war), and March 5th. Even he cited, “I may be accused of apologizing for the Russians. I am not.”
BBC were given rare access to helicopter pilots in Ukraine's Sikorsky Brigade who are part of war in the skies. On combat missions they have to fly as low as one or two metres off the ground. U.S. evaluating 2 Ukrainian pilots for attack aircraft after Ukraine pleas for F-16s.
Polish port of Gdynia currently full of American military equipment, a preparation for full-scale and or long-term war. Quarreling in Warsaw and Berlin over missiles, tanks and spare parts has reached a new level.
But U.S. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green criticizes Zelensky at CPAC: "Leave your hands off of our sons and daughters." U.S. House Speaker Kevin Owen McCarthy, since October 2022 until now considering as much as $75 billion in cuts to the defense budget for helping to defend Ukraine against Russia’s unprovoked invasion in order to win over right-wing members who have balked at the idea of writing a “blank check” to Ukraine with American taxpayer money.
Angela Merkel, former Germany Chancellor, has admitted she was only buying time to rearm the Ukrainian army. Volodymyr Zelensky laughs at the signing of the Minsk Accords in Paris, 2019. And this is very coincidental: Merkel stepped down formally in December 2021, and the war started February 24th, 2022. It's an escalation that's solved by diplomacy since MInsk Accords until at least January 2022, not more escalation. NATO, U.S. itself, Russia, and Ukraine choose: war. Washington has succumbed to dangerous groupthink on Russia (& then: on China).
China’s supposed "peace plan" for Ukraine is nothing more than a list of familiar Beijing's talking points about the war: pro-territorial integrity & anti-unilateral sanctions, expansion of U.S.-led military alliances etc. Expectations around the paper were raised by Wang Yi, who had announced the proposal at MSC (Munich Security Conference) in his remarks and exchange with founder of MSC, Wolfgang Ischinger. Those who expected a roadmap to peace will surely be disappointed. Yet the authors of China's position paper has no such ambition, and certainly does not intend for Beijing to become deeply embroiled in the conflict. Note that the paper was unveiled by Foreign Minister (Qin Gang), not Xi Jinping.
The document predictably lacks specifics about burning issues such as resolving the territorial dispute or security guarantees for Ukraine. Moreover, the language of the document does not bind anyone to anything, China included. This is a feature, not a bug. Beijing also understands that there is no serious demand in Moscow, Kyiv, or the West for a peace plan or other compromise—at least at this point in time, when all sides are ready to give war a chance.
But why would China still draft such a "peace plan" then? The main reason is that remaining on the fence—even one as wide as the Great Wall—is becoming increasingly difficult for Beijing. China has come under intensifying criticism in relation to the war, including from Europe. This is why the Chinese document is sooner a rebuttal to Western allegations that Beijing has been a silent accomplice to Moscow, and an attempt to bolster China's image as a responsible world power in the eyes of developing countries.
President Biden has rejected the Chinese position paper outright in his ABC interview with David Muir. These reactions suit Beijing entirely, giving it ammunition for the next time it is accused of quietly abetting Putin’s aggression. "If the diplomatic effort has collapsed before it even started, the world has only the West to blame," the China talking points will be. However, given recent U.S. calculated disclosures about potential shipment of China weapons to Russia, for Beijing, the title of peacemaker will not come without a fight, even as its leaders do their best to stay out of a bigger, bloodier one in Ukraine. Such “mediation fever” doesn't just court disappointment. It rests on a faulty understanding of the war and risks both distraction & complacence.
Though some may eagerly seek “extreme competition” and others refuse to budge from irredentist desires, staking claim as a global or regional leader means that you must show at least some interest in the art of the deal. Russia's sanctions-dodging is only getting more advanced—especially when it comes to flogging the oil that funds Putin's war.
We might not "like" war but it's extremely hard to dispute we keep getting embroiled into wars, during our entire history. So at the very least we're truly terrible at preventing them. I don't think we're truly more keen on war than others. But we're victims of our geography (lots of states on a territory not divided by natural boundaries, see entire Africa) and we never had the wisdom to unite. There's the EU but the jury is still very much out on that one. We've seen (Cuba, Ukraine, etc.) what weaponizing a place against a great power next door does. Let's be real. I cited “The Hunt for Red October”, ….. “When I was 12, I helped my daddy build a bomb shelter in our basement, because some fool parked a dozen warheads 90 miles off the coast of Florida.”
Like or not, Ukraine was well armed and prepared, thanks (DANKE) to Merkel (buying time). So was Cuba with nuclear weapons. Turns out that the extremely grave and consequential accusation of "China possibly sending weapons to Russia" was made despite the US "not seeing any evidence" this was the case, John Kirby himself admitted “we don’t know”, no evidence China was arming Russia.
Olaf Scholz suggested that Germany received bilateral assurances from China that it won't supply Russia with weapons for its war against Ukraine. Scholz visited Beijing to meet Xi Jinping in November 2022 before the G20 Summit in Bali, Indonesia. EU Commission President von der Leyen said she had seen "no evidence" of Chinese considerations to send arms. Leyen said at a joint presser with Olaf Scholz in Meseberg. Scholz surprised by saying that China "declared that it will not deliver" weapons to Russia. They’re (especially Pentagon) warning that “this could be happening” and go on to say they see no evidence of it.
After visiting India 2 weeks ago, at least this month Scholz will visit DC and Tokyo. Japan will host G7 in July 2023, so Scholz set a meeting before G7 separately with PM Kishida Fumio. At least BILD and WSJ found out that (both) Macron and Scholz begged Zelensky to start peace talks with Putin.
Has Washington's hawkish consensus on Russia and China created a more secure world for Americans and others? Or are we moving down a path that takes us toward decades of arms races, crises, perhaps even war?
Iraq and Afghanistan. The most evil, disastrous wars America ever waged & its legacy not only abroad but here at home. The Mattis stuff may get the most attention. If there is no sign (even little) prospect of peace, Ukraine - Russia will be the most disastrous wars (funded by) America (taxpayers). Or, Mike Bloomberg has a unique measure, analogy: The economic damage caused by the Ukraine-Russia war “could make the cost being paid by the United States for Iraq-Afghanistan look like bubkes.”
Bakhmut, Donetsk, Mariinka, Crimea already destroyed. Please, we can call (again) peace talks, to prevent more casualties.